The Analysis Of Similar Cases As Huang’s Robbery Case

Robbery crime and kidnapping crime have multiple and serious characteristics.They are similar and confused in law and behavior.In judicial practice,there are different judgments for the same cases.The academic circles also put forward several distinguishing standards.In Huang’s robbery and other sample cases,there are a dispute on the application of the right of self-determination of the third party standard or the "two on the spot" standard to distinguish the two crimes,and how to deal with the problem when robbery and kidnapping coexist.It is the premise of accurate application to clarify the nature and connotation of the right of self-determination of the third party,which refers to the free right of any third party to dispose of property due to the threat of the kidnapped person’s personal safety.It is the subjective component of the crime of kidnapping.As long as the actor has the intention of using the right of self-determination of the third party subjectively,or holds a laissez faire attitude towards it,and the third party actually knows the kidnapped person is in danger,that meets the requirement.The redefinition of the status and connotation of "two on the spot" is the only way for its appl ication.It can’t support the establishment of robbery crime alone,and the traditional connotation also lags behind."Two on the spot" is the on-the-spot nature of using violence and robbing property.The robbing property should be divided into two steps of asking for property and obtaining property,one is the behavior performance,the other is the behavior result,as long as violence and demanding property are on the spot in time and space that consistent with "two spot".When robbery and kidnapping coex ist,it is necessary to distinguish the robbery of property in the process of kidnapping and the change of criminal intention.The former constitutes a crime of robbery and kidnapping,which should be punished with a heavier punishment;the latter includes the conversion of criminal intention and another intention of crime.When there is a conversion of criminal intention,the heavier kidnapping crime should be determined according to the rule of the heavier act absorb the lighter,and the suspension of cri me should be considered;when there is another intention of crime,the robbery and the kidnapping should be punished simultaneously.The function of the two standards is not to distinguish,but to convict accurately.In fact,the essence of the two standards is still the constitutive elements of the crime.The coexistence of robbery and kidnapping should also be handled according to the corresponding rules on the basis of the accurate conviction.Only by correctly identifying the elements,refining the han dling rules,improving the relevant provisions,and reasonably interpreting the provisions,can we accurately judge,realize the adaptation between the legality of crime and punishment and the responsibility of crime,and realize the same cases have same sentences,so as to enhance the judicial credibility,establish judicial authority,and realize the fairness and justice of the law.